US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I am curious who you would vote for in the US presidential election. This is nonscientific and nobody can see who voted how. This is not meant to cause flame wars about politics. In general I am curious how the makeup of ITT users would vote. Obviously this will allow people all over the planet to vote, not just people in the USA.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Meh. Doesn't matter anyway.. personal votes don't matter in the main election.

Only the primaries and senate/governor elections. Presidential elections are done via Electoral College.. most states are either Red, or Blue, and will vote Red, or Blue regardless who you vote for.. and the swing states will vote whoever the politicians want.. not necessarily who the people want.

Hence why a president can win Popular vote.. and still not get into the WH :).

We're not a true democracy.. we're a republic. And we've already done all we can do to put whoever is going to be in the white house.. in the white house, by electing those whose votes really count already. That won't change on Nov 08.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I will never support either of the two major parties until there is serious reform of the process.

I'm not holding my breath for that, so Other it is. ;)

The real wasted vote is the one that perpetuates a corrupt status quo.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Maybe it's not intended to, but you know what a can of worms you just opened...

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

What a joke poll. Penguinbait seems to be in favor of the 2-party system as much as the Democrats and Republicans are.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Yes, isn't it exciting :cool:

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

To me (Dutch) both the Democrats and Republicans seem like fairly conservative parties with no fundamental differences in policy, only in retoric. I also find it hard to understand Americans accept the way corporations and lobbygroups fund campaigns and get favors in return. It would not be accepted in Holland.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Why do you think I am in favor of a two party system. Was I supposed to put up Nader and Ron Paul and Cynthia McKinney and any others? I have not even voted in my poll and you cant see who did or what they voted for.

I put other up there as an option, I did not specify because no matter who I included I would have left someone off.

I do not believe in a two party system. That cannot be changed however by voting for someone outside the two party system when there is not one third party candidate that will be on all the tickets in all the states.

And even if there was a third party candidate on all the tickets and they happen to win, you know the electoral college would pick one of people in the two party system.

Its a joke alright, but I am not the punchline?


So lets ALL try to refrain from name calling and finger pointing, this is exactly what the two party system expects us to do.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

My only issue with the poll options is the "Why bother voting" specifies that it's because of some conspiracy theorists security flaw and "zomfg my vote is being changed" paranoia...

Not because it actually Doesn't Matter :D.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Well I am a self proclaimed conspiracy theorist :)

That said, I do not trust Diebold voting machines.

The gaming system in the USA is more secure than the voting system. This is the most ignorant thing I have ever seen. I personally think voting for president should be the same in every state. It should be accountable and verifiable and most certainly re-countable.

I believe that the electoral colleges should be done away with and ONLY popular vote determines our future. Not hanging chads and supreme courts.


Am I paranoid, yes, and you should be too!!

:)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

This we agree with. I think the EC thing is just downright stupid. And I think public elections are a joke until the EC is destroyed. There is no valid reason to vote at a general election. Primaries maybe.. but not the general.

ETA: I should specify I am also against the bi-polar system as well. It shouldn't be about which "side" is funding what.. people should run for president, show what they believe, and whoever wins, wins. Party having nothing to do with it. It breeds segregation, hatred, mal-content, and supports idiocy. People who "just vote the party line" and have no opinion for themselves do this country no good.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I'm for a two party system because with a lot of parties, it would be too difficult for voters to seriously look at the performance of individual parties and measure their performance. There is a rough calculus that voters have followed with the two-party system -- when disaster strikes, vote out the party in power and give the other party a chance.

Hmm, I wonder who that calculus would favor now?

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

this thread needs Bensons votingsystem theories.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

2 parties isn't enough for true checks-and-balances. It fosters eventual collusion-- witness our current situation where the 2 parties only differ substantially in rhetoric (and even there not so much). Simply adding one more party to the mix exponentially increases the opportunity for fairness in the system and process. Look at the scare Ross Perot once threw into the works. We had a brief bit of accountability-- and then the 2 parties met behind closed doors and specifically excluded others from the game.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

As any chess player knows, there are many ways of setting things up, and most of them are sound. It took hundreds of years for chess players to figure that out, though; even 50 years ago, players had a very exaggerated idea that there was an extremely narrow range of correct play. Now, anything goes.

The same goes with government -- many kinds of government can work. It's the total system that counts. This goes for two-party vs multiple party system, for example. They both can work.

The advantage of the two-party system is that a majority or near-majority almost always rules. A party that believes in abortion but really doesn't care about other issues is not likely to take power here, and that is just an example.

The two parties are similar because they are both trying to appeal to the majority of the people, and only certain ideological mixes have a chance to win the vote. It is more or less impossible for a Communist or Nazi party to be viable.

The electoral college of course existed to begin with because the Founding Fathers didn't trust the American people all the way. It was a kind of escape hatch if the people went crazy, or against the interest of the propertied classes, which is who the Founding Fathers were primarily interested in.

Cases in which the electoral college is important are quite rare. We have had a few recent examples, but in the long run it is a very minor issue. I am not sure I would rather an election be determined by the electoral college or by the fact that certain states happened to have rainy days and thus turnout in those states was low.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I think 2-party collusion is inevitable. Sure, it can work in theory, and even in reality for some time, but collusion to avoid competition is in our nature. It takes that "third eye" to introduce objectivity.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I think that collusion is inevitable, and desirable. Objectivity is in the third eye of the beholder.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

How does your 2 party system work for the people who believe in the 2nd Amendment, and also are Pro-Choice.

Or Pro-Life anti-gunners?

Or people who agree with the war; but want stronger environmental regulations and laws?

Why must I be forced to pick a candidate backed by a party with a very specific set of stances across the board?

And I know.. we aren't "forced" to pick a party.. but the fact of the matter is with the EC it doesn't matter if this entire country voted for Mickey Mouse.

The Red states would vote Red. The Blue states would vote Blue. And the independent states would vote whatever they wanted. You still end up with either a Red, Or Blue president.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I agree with you about the two party system, however I think these candidates are not close on many issues. And if McCain would stop repeating Obama's slogans people would be much less confused about actual issues. I know nobody wants to talk about issues, they want to talk about lipstick and other non-issues.

McCains plans for healthcare will cover about 5million new people out of 45 million, Obama's plan covers about 37million out of the 45million people without health insurance.


I am not saying that either one is better than the other but there are DEFINITE differences between the candidates. These are not Moe or Moe. More like Curley or Shemp.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

With the two-party system, people are basically forced to ally themselves with people they disagree with. This is fortunate, because forced compromise is a good thing, it's called "tolerance". People aren't tolerant because they are innately good, but because tolerance is sensible.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Yeah, that's what Standard Oil executives once said.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

They also said that traffic laws were desirable and that murder should be a crime.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I'm too cynical to believe that Collusion Always Turns Out Good.

We are currently lacking proper oversight, checks and balances in our candidate selection process, as has been evident for over a decade now. It has finally managed to indeed manifest the worst fears of those claiming money was more important than issues. Without it, you don't get out of the gate.

When the old adage that "anyone can become president" is no longer true, then IMO it's time to examine why, and fix it. With only two major parties, there is a huge disincentive against such action.

I'll go back to being optimistic when the lipsticked pigs begin to fly.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

No one said or thinks that Collusion Always Turns Out Good. But describing the current situation as simply the result of collusion is way oversimplifying.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Sorry... I just felt that bringing every aspect of the issue into the thread would crash the server.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
VOTE MEGATRON!
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u...d/megatron.jpg

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Not entirely; it also goes back to when the states were, you know, states. It provided representation to states as well as citizens by including Senators in the EC apportionment. It appears (to me, without any known scholarly backing) that one reason the Founders didn't foresee the two-party system we have was an expectation of state and regional concerns dominating. Of course, after the Civil War era (most especially Reconstruction), states began to fade out, consolidating power in the Federal realm, and consequently the two parties we've come to know and hate.

True, with our flawed election system. But with range voting or similar, the Electoral College would be a much bigger issue. (And I'll take this opportunity to urge everyone who wouldn't vote because it's raining to stay home regardless.)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

George Washington warned us against parties.

We didn't listen.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I love parties, especially the political kind. I don't have time to study all the issues in depth, and that's why I like having a representative government -- it's the representative's job to know the issues more than it is mine. That's why I don't like term limitations -- pretty much for the same reason I wouldn't want term limitations for my doctor. He's a professional and I'm glad.

If there were no parties, I would do in-depth studies of my Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Controller, etc etc? Not.

I wouldn't have more time to study the qualifications of and nuances of speeches by all these people. A political party gives me a handy way of distinguishing various politicians. I think that Democracy would be totally unworkable without parties. Maybe that's why every single country has parties that I know of. Please jump out and let me know about a country that doesn't have parties and that works great.

It's amazing how effective theories can be when there are no practical examples. That's why the ideologies of Socialism or Communism or Libertarianism are so effective -- since there are no pure examples of these ideologies having been put into effect, proponents can simply point to fantasy states -- and fantasy ALWAYS works better than reality.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Indeed, I don't think collusion is necessary in a rigid 2-party system (which plurality tends towaraw) to explain the surface problems we have.

With two parties, each starting at some position in an n-dimensional voter space, they both have a 'base' consisting of voters in their lobe of a hyperboloid (of two sheets) with focii at the two positions; those are the voters closer by a certain amount to that party, and so voting for it out of practical necessity.

Voters outside the hyperboloid are up for grabs, with probabilities of going each way proportional to relative closeness. But they might be swayed by rhetoric, and certainly by moving your platform closer to the center. If the distribution of voters is uneven, you'll try to shift to bring dense areas behind you at the expense of sparse areas.

Eventually, you wind up in a local equilibrium with the parties as close as they can get while insuring that voters can still distinguish them.

Now there's complexities not covered yet, such as multiple candidates (P & VP, plus other less significant ones), and the need to avoid irrational behavior (staying home or voting third party) from the base, but these seem to fit in nicely with this collusion-free model.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

All of that assumes that what we see is what we're getting.

I quit accepting that at face value a long time ago.

Granted, putting the subject of collusion on center stage appears to be oversimplifying, but I've learned enough to know that closed-door collusion is the root of all political evil... and, ironically, of the worst kind when it's presented as in the public's best interest.

No thanks. I'll take transparency, public debate, gridlock and even outright rancor between parties anyday. History shows that when the 2 parties agree it is time for their constituents to head for the hills... with few (albeit major) exceptions.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Well, its early but, so far its pretty much the results I expected.


I think it has stayed pretty civilized.

And to everyone that says your vote does not count. Your wrong, it does count, and I advise everyone to look at the issues that effect you carefully.

What issues effect you, where do both candidate stand on the issue

College tuition
Something must be done we are burdening our Families to extremes. People either pull from 401K to pay for kids college, or kids end up paying back loans till their 40.


Social Security
We must keep SS alive. So many seniors are living off social security, and with the price of gas, food, and everything else they are deciding between food or medication or heat.

Healthcare
I believe in Universal Healthcare for all Americans. I personally had a great plan, last year. This year its the same company, but now I pay $250 more a month and have deductibles and less coverage. There is so many people who can only afford to keep health insurance and only go to the doctors when they absolutely have to because they can not afford the copays and deductibles. Whatever your take on healthcare, where do the candidates stand?

Tax Breaks for Oil companies?

Gas Prices
I would love to be off the supply of foreign oil in 10 years. Could it happen? It seems unlikely to me, however if you declared in 1961, that we were going to the moon in 10 years, I would have laughed in your face :D

Eagle landed on the surface of the moon at 20:17 UTC on July 20 1969 with about 25 seconds of fuel left.

It only took 8 years

America is a awesome country, there is nothing we cannot accomplish when we put our minds to it. America has been beat down for the last few years, and needs some serious direction.

We are all responsible to actually vote on issues, not for donkeys or elephants, but for people who will be the best representative for the issues you care about deeply.


Don't vote on party lines, look at the issues that effect you, and vote for the team that has the solutions you need.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Senator Roflcopter for President

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Agreed, the electoral college must go.

For those interested, here is a link that either debunks or confirms ads by presidential candidates.

factcheck.org

My absentee ballot application is in the mail.

thaibill

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

OK, first off, yes I am going to vote for one of the major parties, although my heart is not entirely in it. (I'm skipping specifying which just to keep out of flame wars.) With the way campaigns are funded, "collusion" isn't necessary -- both sides need huge campaign war chests, and those are provided by big money. A candidate can't even get to the primaries without being something of a whore. Both major parties are fundamentally corporate-owned. (Heck, we no longer allow for forgiveness of debts in bankruptcy, even when the bankruptcy is caused by medical bills, and we don't have national health care; but today we've announced a rescue for the speculative banking industry on the order of $500 billion or more.)

I think the United States desperately needs third parties, but the system is rigged so they can't get a toehold. The solution, which, of course, the two corporate parties will block, would begin with "Instant-Runoff Voting" -- that would allow a person to vote his/her conscience without fear they were "wasting" their vote. Eventually, conscience could win out. But for that to happen, we literally need a Constitutional amendment, since the Supreme Court keeps ruling that any worthwhile limitation on how much money can be spent on an election is a violation of the guarantee of Freedom of Speech. (You can have as much speech as you can pay for!) The result is a war of TV ads that say nothing, cost a fortune, determine the election, and are funded by big money.

Frankly, I'm pretty low on hope for the United States. We've sold out the better values and get by now by borrowing and bullying. (OK, maybe I'll end up bringing on the flaming after all. But at least click on the link for Instant Runoff Elections.)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

It also allowed slave states to have more power. A slave state gets extra electoral votes, because 2/3 of their slave population is added to the total white population when calculating the number of electors. Then, of course, only the white folks got to vote for the electors.

--

On a lighter note, Vote Quimby!!!

http://www.thesimpsons.com/quimby2000/index.html

Re: US Presidential Candidate Pol
 

Don't worry, I think you've made it clear enough which. :p

Let me get this straight; are you saying that because we don't have campaign finance regulation, we can't change voting methods, or am I misunderstanding you?

Be aware that while IRV can sustain a multi-party system, it does not permit full transition from 2-party to multi-party; barring special assymetries, the 2 existing parties will stick around as the dominant party, because the spoiler effect does reappear when a third party gets close to the other two. Also, it's just insanely twitchy even in an existing multi-party system. Range voting is a much better option, and also has the advantage of maximizing Bayesian utility. See the thread on the maemo.org community council elections for extensive discussion and some good links on this stuff.

Finally, I think you overrate the effectiveness of ads. Is it a colossal waste of money and a drain on the economy? Yes. Does it really change election outcomes? I don't think substantially. (Although in honesty, I'm definitely more invested in the free-speech bandwagon than the economic or pragmatic side, so I do find the notion of campaign finance regulation revulsive, and would continue to do so even if you could prove the ads are effective; so maybe it doesn't matter.)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

If only I were old enough to vote... :(

Mine would go to Bob Barr.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Pol
 

The Swift Boat ads, however inaccurate they were, had a significant impact on John Kerrey's electability.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I really don't see much difference between bad and worse. But beyond that: Isn't it interesting to see how a country with such a strange and mostly broken system goes and bombs other nations to "bring democracy to the world"?